Search

Introduction Relaparotomy is a serious complication of caesarean section. The aim of this study was to investigate its risk factors and postoperative outcome. Methods We conducted a retrospective case-control study examining 48 reoperations between January 2013 and June 2017 at the Obstetrics and Perinatology Department, Jagiellonian University Hospital in Cracow, Poland. This is tertiary referral center, in that time 8421 cesarean section were performed. The control group was randomly matched from all CS in a 1 to 2 ratio. The following figures were analyzed: demographic obstetrics data, indication for cesarean section, perioperative data and laboratory results. Patients’ follow up data was evaluated. Results The frequency of relaparotomy was 0.57%. There were no statistically significant differences in indications for primary surgery between the control group and the relaparotomy group. There were only two perioperative factors which increased the risk of relaparotomy: general anesthesia and the duration of operation. Laboratory results were in reference range in both groups, however, in the relaparotomy group, platelets were lower, while APTT and INR were prolonged. The main indication for relaparotomy was bleeding into the peritoneal cavity. Patients with relaparotomy more often required blood transfusion, admission to ICU, as well as longer hospitalization. Conclusion Recognition of risk factors of relaparotomy and proper diligence in hemostasis may decrease its rate.

Objectives 1) To analyze screening performance of second trimester scan for ACC, 2) to evaluate the agreement between ultrasound and MRI and 3) to compare prenatal and postnatal diagnosis. Methods It was a prospective observational study. All patients with fetuses suspected of ACC were referred to prenatal MRI (pMRI). Results One subject was not confirmed by pMRI with the diagnosis of ACC. This case demonstrated partial ACC in neonatal MRI (nMRI). Conclusion Sensitivity of second trimester scan for callosal agenesis of 73% and specificity of 99%. Prenatal MRI and US has similar amount of misdiagnoses.

Objectives: The aim of the study was to assess the level of implementation of recommendations of the Ministry of Health regarding infectious disease screening during pregnancy. Material and methods: The study included 477 patients who were admitted to the delivery room between December 2015 and February 2016. Data on screening test results were collected based on medical records covering the period before the admission. Results: The Human Immunodeficiency Virus (HIV) screening was conducted in 410 (86%). 460 (96%) of patients were screened for Hepatitis B Virus (HBV) and 427 (89.5%) for Hepatitis C Virus (HCV). Syphilis screening covered 465 (97.5%) of patients. Immunoglobulin M (IgM) titer against Rubella Virus (RV) was assessed in 218 (45%) patients and immunoglobulin G (IgG) in 319 (66.9%). Screening for Toxoplasma gondii based on assessment of IgM titer was conducted in 440 (92%) patients while IgG titter was assessed in 413 (86.6%). 343 (71.9%) patients had obtained vaginal swabs for Group B Streptococci (GBS) while the anal swabs were taken only from 268 (56.2%) patients. Conclusions: Coverage of screening for syphilis and HBV was similar to the countries with highest prevalence of conducting such screening, on the other hand RV screening place as among countries with lowest prevalence. There is an increasing trend in conducting HIV screening. Screening for HCV and toxoplasmosis is at satisfactory level and Poland is one of a few European countries offering such screening. The screening for GBS is insufficient which result in excessive use of intrapartum antibiotic prophylaxis.